[ravnostic]

I must say, I’m especially impressed with the entries thus far this week. Else‘s tilt shots, Kestrana‘s flowers, U-man‘s “Can haz? been good” (damn you for one-upping my Blerticus!!), Mopsy, Orionid, Morning Breath, I’m No Big Deal, Ranger Joe, zittle chick, zincprincess…oh, hell, it’s a much shorter list of what I DON’T like than what I do. Votes are flying out like crazy.

Well done, all! A most enjoyable viewing experience. I didn’t think I’d like this contest nearly as much as I do. There is SO much talent in this group. I hope we get many more entries.

[ravnostic]

Next issue, anyone know how I can figure out what the effective magnification is?

Magnification in this context is simply the ratio between the size of an actual object and the size of the image being projected by the lens. So, assuming a sensor width of about 22mm (normal for Canon), and projecting that un-vignetted you’d have about 66mm of ruler showing, that would give you a magnification of about 22/66 or 1/3x.

Zooming to 80mm should approx, double that to about 2/3x, but to get into real macro territory, you’d need to mount it onto a longer lens.

Incidentally, if you go by the rough rule of thumb that stacked lenses gives you magnification approximately equal to the ratio of the focal length of the lenses, that suggests the focal length of the darlot lens is somewhere in the vicinity of 135mm.

Good to know! I’ve used it with my 70-300mm at 300mm; at that mag., I can just fit in 1 centimeter, which makes it about a 2x by my reckoning.

[ravnostic]

ravnostic
Your Darlot might be your “ghetto-rig macro” as you put it, but you get some damned fine results with it.
In particular, I really liked the second picture (flowers) you posted (which I am guessing you took with the Darlot).

Thanks LL (and, too, NBD, from earlier). Lots of fine things have come from the ghetto–Elvis comes to mind (no, wait, that was just a song…)

There are difficulties with using the lens to be sure, but I’ve been very pleased with the results, and I’ve gotten a LOT better at steady hands behind the camera because of it (since it has to be held by hand to the camera’s ‘real’ lens, tripoding just isn’t viable). Besides this week’s entries, 5 of my top 20 ranked photos also employed it. If I were offered a real macro lens in trade for the Darlot, I’d refuse it. There are some properties to that old glass that I don’t think I’d be willing to part with.

[ravnostic]

The forums were actually originally started by Cuddlebutt/Screaming in Digital. There was a falling out in the earliest of days, and they were revamped when he left, but Procedural Texture has been hosting them out of the goodness of his heart and pocketbook since the beginning.

Noted, my apologies to CB/SiD and PT for the oversight and my thanks to PT for his forum hosting.

The theme description was worded such that you could use your zoom lens, no problem, without having to purchase or already own a prime lens. The use of your Darlot lens creating zoom creep is a special circumstance of your choosing. Alternatively, you could use your zoom without the Darlot and without the zoom issues.

The zoom creep is just a mechanical symptom to the Tamron lens, actually. Manually pushing back the objective lens till it seats as close to the camera body as possible seems to be the inexactish issue, that seating point being somewhere near 45mm focal length. The instrument of that push is immaterial. I could have gone with the 28mm setting or 80mm setting without so much fuss, but FOV was then an issue (see below, focusing).

The Darlot itself is my ghetto-rig ‘macro’ lens, essentially giving me something akin to the nifty real macros some of you fine people have been able to purchase or come upon elsewise. Without it, I cannot get anything near true-macro with neither the 28-80mm nor the 70-300mm Tamrons (though 46mm isn’t near as ‘macro’ as I can get, it was a convenient setting affording a FOV that seemed to work well for a variety of shots–I hope.) Keep in mind the lens (with its magic lantern projector) cost me $40. That’s a 10th, if not less, what real macros seem to cost.

Having it, and having figured out how I can use it effectively, it seems a waste not to employ it. FWIW, at a single set focal length (46mm, or any other), there is no other focus option but to move the camera in or out from the subject. Thus my pictures are not only taken at a single focal length, but also at a single focal distance.

Under better circumstances I’d have like to have gone out somewhere interesting to take interesting pictures without all the fuss of the Darlot, but that just didn’t work out with the holiday hubbub. Macro seemed to be the logical choice, though that’s for the voters to decide.

Thanks to sleeping for allowing me it’s use!

[ravnostic]

Of all the themes to generate this much discussion on what’s allowable or not allowable within the description wording, I would never have pegged this one to be that theme. The only thing I could reasonably disqualify at this point would be a zoom-during-exposure. Smoke ’em if ya got ’em.

Respectfully, I disagree. Theme description:

Go shooting with a single prime lens (or set your zoom to a single focal length and don’t change it).

Theme suggestion kudos to sleeping!

Not everyone has a prime lens, hence the caveat.

The clarifications asked have been:

1) Do all pictures need to be from the same ‘prime’ lens?, to which this was the reply:

That wasn’t my intention, but please see this note from the original thread:

Well, I didn’t want to suggest a bunch of rules that would wind up being completely unenforceable, but the idea was to encourage people to go out and shoot with only a single focal length available to them, not “images that happened to be shot with a prime lens”, if that makes sense.

and further clarified with:

The way I understand it, they don’t all have to be taken with the same prime, only that they are taken at a time when you are shooting only with that prime.
Is this correct?

That’s right.

Sleeping added further on Dec. 7th that the shots don’t all have to be with the same lens. Personally, I think that defeats the purpose of the contest, but that’s not my call. Tastes like chicken, as they say.

2) Cropping. I think the net response is cropping would defeat the purpose, and the final call is to limit this to no more than 5-10% of the frame. I’m choosing not to crop at all, as I’m in ‘that’ camp of thought.

3) My issue, which is basically that my lens, when pushed back for ease of shooting with the Darlot, falls into a ‘zone’ of focal length that I cannot precisely control. I don’t have a ‘set to xx mm’ option. If I did, I’d surely have used it.

My solution was to take multiple shots using the same process and find the ones that registered as the same focal length. Use of the Darlot, though simply held against the camera lens, isn’t any different than screwing on a wide-field or telephoto adapter lens made for a lens–I just have to hold it in place. A 28 mm with a 2x ‘wide angle’ lens is the equivalent of a 14m, for one who doesn’t have one.

My contention is it’s still shooting (or attempting to) at one focal length. My caveat is I had to take more shots than I would have (had I been able to just ‘tune’ my camera to a particular focal length and it stayed there), then pick among them the ones that registered as the same. This is my life without the money to go out and buy all the prime lenses that I’d like to own.

I’d wager I’m not alone in this quandry, though my Darlot is a unique twist.

There’s been plenty of discussion, but only about these few subjects. Ultimately, policing any contest is an imperfect science. And making theme descriptions that are cut and dry to begin with is no less a perfect undertaking. I think that’s just part of the process, and justification to having schnee‘s forum to begin with.

[ravnostic]

Umm that 1st one is a cat, and a good cat shot at that. I think you get an automatic number of vote just for posting a cat.

Not just ‘a’ cat, but Blerticus cat. It’s my favorite of the three, but I’m biased. Blert’s one of my favorite subjects.

When is “I did! I did see a puddy tat!” anyways?

[ravnostic]

But it’s also in front of a zoom lens that slides around between 42 and 46mm. That’s not exactly set at a single focal length as the theme requires..

I’ve got 3 (usable shots) where the EXIF data tells me they are all at 46mm (I can only presume the camera itself knows it’s focal length). Given the Darlot cannot be changed, then whatever the combo focal length is, it should be equal between the three. The Darlot, for what it’s worth, is not reversed in any of the three, which would affect the ratios due to where the lenses sit within the Darlot lens body itself (extensioning). I’m working with the equipment I have, not the equipment I wish I’d have.

It’s pretty evident (to me) in the shots that they are all within spec, of equal focal length. But hey, I’m just an end-user. Here’s a link to the three I plan using. Your call. It’s either these, or I’ll sit this one out, as I don’t have time at this point to get viable alternatives.

I’d rather not post at all than pick three alt’s taken though the telescope that, while guaranteed ‘prime’, don’t come close to the Hubble-quality that people expect from astrophotography and wouldn’t get squat for votes.

As it is I don’t think my shots are going to fair well, so if I have to sit it out for lack of equipment, so be it.

http://fossilspringsaz.com/pics/2010/dec/08/check.html

(going with an animal/vegetable/mineral theme, obviously)

[ravnostic]

I’ve decided to go with the Darlot ‘macro’ for this, but I have a problem. I’m using it in conjunction with my 28-80mm Tamron lens. This lens, at 28 mm, is slightly extended. As you bring it ‘up’ it retracts to somewhere near 44-46mm, then extends back out as it approaches 80mm. Since the Darlot is merely held up to the Tamron lens, I find its a bit easier to manage if I use it to ‘push’ back the Tamron to it’s fully retracted position. That gives a nice vignetting around the edges of the frame. Problem being that it’s an inexact science, and I have pictures registering from 42mm to 46mm. I’m going with three at 46mm, though I’d like to use one at 42 as I like it better. But prime is prime. I’ll live.

Next issue, anyone know how I can figure out what the effective magnification is? I’m not sure it’s even not 46mm, just that I can be inches from the subject rather than 2.5 feet. It’s a petzval lens, if that’s any help. Here’s a shot (which happened to register at 43mm) though the same gettup as for the contest to give an idea of scale. The front optic of the Darlot is about 3 inches from the ruler here.

[ravnostic]

I’d asked about cropping early on, and said I wasn’t for it, but I can see a crop on one axis only as being fair game. That maintains the width of the frame in at least one direction, as a standard.

But I agree with U-man, it’s late in the game for a change.

//still sticking with my idea of not cropping my shots.

///still stuck on the ideas for the actual shots part.

[ravnostic]

I’ve been shooting with my 50 mm yesterday and today. I really don’t like being restricted with my lens choices. I understand the purpose of the theme – I just don’t like it. 🙁

I hear this. You’d think this would be easy, but I’m having a difficult time, and I’m only in the planning stages.

[ravnostic]

These astronomical photo-ops are a useful weather prediction tool- I can tell, sometimes months ahead of time, what nights will be overcast or rainy.

ta funnay!

It’s true, even in sunny Arizona. I had to wait for a cloud break to capture my moon. I had about 10 minutes with it before it got clouded over again. Tomorrow morning’s opportunity looks to be overcast as well, so maybe no Vesuvian shadows for me…

[ravnostic]

I guess I’m also wondering if we’re discussing scrapping the FSM for something new or….? I know schnee has always been open to suggestions in the past, so I’m wondering if there were requests or ideas for the FSM why not just make suggestions to him? Not to denigrate CauseISaidSo’s clearly masterful grasp of statistics and his own cool graphs thereof, but to be honest, I’m feeling a little like we’re talking about reinventing the wheel or throwing the baby out with the bath water. schnee’s been with Farktography since theme #24, and he’s put a lot into the community. Personally, I wouldn’t want to see the FSM go away.

I certainly didn’t want to convey that–and hope I didn’t! Stat resources are like money at an auction–the more, the better! I go to a number of news outlets, some general, some specific, some opinionated. I like the differing vantage points and subject focuses when assessing my world around me. This is no different, just on a photographic scale.

[ravnostic]

hey that’s really cool. idle curiosity but can you tell “before” and “after” by the side of the moon that you see.

I think what you’re asking is whether you can tell if the moon is ‘going’ to be new or has just ‘past’ new by the side that’s illuminated?

The practical answer is you don’t need to. The moon travels from west to east against the background sky, so the moon is newest when you see it in the west after sunset, and oldest when seen in the east before sunrise.

When it’s full, the moon rises near sunset. If shortly after sunset you can see it [edit-“already”] somewhere up in the sky, then it’s ‘waxing’ (growing) toward a full moon. If it rises more than an hour after sunset, then it’s ‘waning’ (shrinking) toward a new moon.

[ravnostic]

First and foremost, I’d like to thank Schnee for creating and hosting the FSM. I don’t think (and did not read any indication here) that any of us are ungrateful for his (her?) work, and it’s definitely helped my enjoyment and learning curve, being able to look through other’s farktography portfolios.

That being said, I’d like to thank you, too, even if you just enjoy the programming exercise. As a math geek, I know how fun numbers can be, and it’s always interesting to tweek the algorithms and see how things measure up. I’m glad you’ve taken on the task, and I’m sure you’ll provide your own number theory ‘personality’ to whatever it is you go live with one day.

For me, I’m in the camp that likes the current rank system. If two tie for 1st place, it makes no sense that the next highest placed, 3rd among them, be 2nd. But that’s just me.

For the rest of it, I have no preferences, and not many well-thought-out opinions. I’ll be happy with whatever you come up with. If you were getting paid, I’d expect every bell and whistle. But as you’re not, I’ll accept what you have to offer and be happy with the results, regardless.

[ravnostic]

keep me posted!

[Author]

Posts